Merge in turn vigilantes

[ttaskmaster]

You are confusing a lot of things I've said and why.

Stop posting them out of context, then.

Sure it might be viable now but that is beside the point

No, that is EXACTLY the point - It's perfectly viable and dirt-cheap compared to anything else, bar letting people **** up and fining them for it, and yet they do nothing about it.
Why?
Because it's more effective to blanket the UK with campaigns until the few people still driving in the 1950s wise up and step up to standard?
Nope.
It costs money... money which they're not prepared to spend on something that isn't even killing enough people to show up on their radar.

- the point was the HA's analysis identified social factors that meant awareness of merge in turn was low which meant looking at measures to deal with that - they even specifically identify trends from the 1950s as having an impact.

Which is irrelevant to the world today and how things work today.
This is how it's done. Wise up or get fined.

I assume under the assumption that being taught over that period would have a big enough impact to influence overall usage which hasn't really worked.

Or because it didn't justify the cost of massive awareness campaigns that are pretty ineffective...

So a couple million a year on anti-drink-driving campaigns and yet still people are drink-driving. In fact, looking at just those caught and successfully convicted, in just 2015, the numbers are in the tens of thousands... almost 40,000. Checking the stats, drink-drivers KSI'd over 1300 people and injured almost 7,000 more... but brought in over £107,000,000 in fines.

Not bad for a few million outlay, right?
Much better than all the health campaigns that are costing many hundreds of millions over the same period and have been largely ineffective. Diet improvement campaining alone has shown only the "suggestion of slight improvement" over the past 10 years... and those ads really are everywhere!!

 

[Rroff]

Stop posting them out of context, then.

Its pretty plain - you are getting bogged down picking apart things I've used merely as an illustration that they were done for a reason and that reason being something that supported my argument.

So a couple million a year on anti-drink-driving campaigns and yet still people are drink-driving. In fact, looking at just those caught and successfully convicted, in just 2015, the numbers are in the tens of thousands... almost 40,000. Checking the stats, drink-drivers KSI'd over 1300 people and injured almost 7,000 more... but brought in over £107,000,000 in fines.

Knew you'd come up with this - you aren't comparing like to like - one would be an informational campaign to raise awareness especially those who've been taught or brought up to understand a practise as correct different to the current approach which should be fairly short lived before hitting critical mass of awareness the other is a campaign to try and prevent something happening that no one has ever been brought up to believe is the correct approach i.e. drink driving which is always going to be an ongoing effort.

 

[ttaskmaster]

Its pretty plain - you are getting bogged down picking apart things I've used merely as an illustration that they were done for a reason and that reason being something that supported my argument.

That reason, however present or absent, is still no excuse at the end of the day, which was my assertion in the first place.

Knew you'd come up with this - you aren't comparing like to like

Both are awareness campaigns, are they not?
The point is that with something FAR more serious and with a much wider target, much more present audience, people have not heeded it.
So in the face of that and other such campaigns, what makes you think you'll find success with even an equally large awareness campaign to combat a pretty darn minor issue caused by a much smaller target audience that is far more elusive, with the added complication of the majority of offenders already being aware of the law and openly disregarding it?

On top of that, all the Speed Kills campaigns and artsy farty commercials with children going, "I'm going to die. You've just killed me" have been arguably ineffective compared to the signs that flash up when you're driving over the speed limit, especially the ones that show what speed you're actually doing.
Signs rule.

 

[Rroff]

The point is that with something FAR more serious and with a much wider target, much more present audience, people have not heeded it.

My point as always is that there are still a not insignificant number of people who aren't aware the approach they've been brought up to believe is incorrect and one that factually has been born out of things that in the past were accepted as the way to do things - persuading people like that to change their approach is a far different issue to trying to change perception of things like speeding where most are fully aware of what they are supposed to do.

Its kind of telling that you are having to pretty much blanket accuse everyone on the road of a ridiculously poor approach to driving to try and close out any possibility of any other reasoning.

 

[ttaskmaster]

My point as always is that there are still a not insignificant number of people who aren't aware the approach they've been brought up to believe is incorrect and one that factually has been born out of things that in the past were accepted as the way to do things - persuading people like that to change their approach is a far different issue to trying to change perception of things like speeding where most are fully aware of what they are supposed to do.

That's nice.
They are still a small minority and far less the cause of the main problem than wilfully bad driving, which itself is far less of a problem compared to the more serious ones.

Its kind of telling that you are having to pretty much blanket accuse everyone on the road of a ridiculously poor approach to driving to try and close out any possibility of any other reasoning.

We tried other reasoning. We tried awareness campaigns and all that guff - It. Did. Not. Work.
It's quite telling that you fail to even address anything regarding that aspect and instead continue to focus on how much of a loving liberal I'm not - Yes, I am draconian all the way and would burn them at the stake if I had the chance. Never claimed any different. Problem?
Now, about this lovey-dovey education programme you want to spend people's money on in order to not combat the problem at hand....

 

[Rroff]

We tried other reasoning. We tried awareness campaigns and all that guff - It. Did. Not. Work.
It's quite telling that you fail to even address anything regarding that aspect and instead continue to focus on how much of a loving liberal I'm not - Yes, I am draconian all the way and would burn them at the stake if I had the chance. Never claimed any different. Problem?
Now, about this lovey-dovey education programme you want to spend people's money on in order to not combat the problem at hand....

LOL OK we can all see what the problem is here.

 

[ttaskmaster]

LOL OK we can all see what the problem is here.

No, you see why I disagree with your approach. That's all "we" all see.

So you want to hug people that don't give a toss in the first place and sit down with them like it's a Sunday School tale on how to merge. People will then go out and do exactly whatever they want, regardless because, as other posters have already explained, they have no reason not to.

It's people's responsibility to know the laws that relate to their activities and their responsibility to obey those laws. It's up to the Police to enforce the laws, not the people. This is the same pretty much the whole world over, so not even a uniquely UK problem.

You start punishing people over something and word will spread fast, especially these days with so much in terms of social media and access to news - Plus, it will happen FOR FREE as papers rush to get the headlines in, so forget your awareness campaign and let the media do the job at zero cost. In the rather short meantime, it will bring in revenue from the inevitable fines, which would likely pay for as much Merge-In-Turn signage as you could want, so again those are FREE too. You can't even argue that people are being sacrificed to promote the law, as it's been 'law' for some time, now and it's up to them to know it - Had they been doing what they should have, they'd not be called to account for it.

I'm seeing a win-win all round here... which perhaps is the tack the government is taking, too.

 

[Rroff]

No, you see why I disagree with your approach. That's all "we" all see.

I see why you have such a terrible time all the time while driving

 

[ttaskmaster]

I see why you have such a terrible time all the time while driving

I don't, actually. But I see plenty of others who do...

 

[lordrobs]

Thread bump but I had my worst ever instance of this today, usual place and guess what, it was an OAP lady. Traffic was heavy and I came off the roundabout in the outside lane as I always do which allows traffic to join seamlessly from the slip road a couple of hundred yards up. Ratio of traffic is about 2/3 inside lane to 1/3 outside. All flowing quite nicely and as I get towards the merge point I position my car between the OAP in the Yaris and the car infront of her. She closes the gap "here we go" I thought but I carry on. As the lanes start to come together she sticks her car into the ever decreasing gap and leans on the horn. I should have just carried on but it was going to end in an accident. She literally was about an inch from ramming me for "pushing in". Adrenalin pumping through me I jump out of the car, I wanted to ask her if she actually did want to cause an accident. This probably looked quite threatening, I'm a fairly big guy but soft as **** and have never raised my hand to anyone, let alone an OAP but she wasn't to know that. So she drove up and over the curb and up the road.

Now the irony of it. Next set of lights is another merge in turn but because it has been there since forever people tend to use the outside lane if they are going straight over. So I pull up alongside her and signal for her to wind down her window staying in the car this time. I shouted across "Are you trying to cause an accident. That was two lanes merging in to one, just as it is up ahead. Two lanes.... merging in to one." I couldn't quite make out her response but it was along the lines of "If you try to wipe me out I'll wipe you out" Seriously, WTF. I'm commuting and she's at ******* war. I'm using the outer lane so as not to block traffic, she's looking for a fight.

Next time, I'll just do what I should have and drive her clean out of road if that's what she really wants.

 

[Glanza]

Thread bump but I had my worst ever instance of this today, usual place and guess what, it was an OAP lady. Traffic was heavy and I came off the roundabout in the outside lane as I always do which allows traffic to join seamlessly from the slip road a couple of hundred yards up. Ratio of traffic is about 2/3 inside lane to 1/3 outside. All flowing quite nicely and as I get towards the merge point I position my car between the OAP in the Yaris and the car infront of her. She closes the gap "here we go" I thought but I carry on. As the lanes start to come together she sticks her car into the ever decreasing gap and leans on the horn. I should have just carried on but it was going to end in an accident. She literally was about an inch from ramming me for "pushing in". Adrenalin pumping through me I jump out of the car, I wanted to ask her if she actually did want to cause an accident. This probably looked quite threatening, I'm a fairly big guy but soft as **** and have never raised my hand to anyone, let alone an OAP but she wasn't to know that. So she drove up and over the curb and up the road.

Now the irony of it. Next set of lights is another merge in turn but because it has been there since forever people tend to use the outside lane if they are going straight over. So I pull up alongside her and signal for her to wind down her window staying in the car this time. I shouted across "Are you trying to cause an accident. That was two lanes merging in to one, just as it is up ahead. Two lanes.... merging in to one." I couldn't quite make out her response but it was along the lines of "If you try to wipe me out I'll wipe you out" Seriously, WTF. I'm commuting and she's at ******* war. I'm using the outer lane so as not to block traffic, she's looking for a fight.

Next time, I'll just do what I should have and drive her clean out of road if that's what she really wants.

I get annoyed at the best of times but never to the point where I'd jump out of the car to shout at someone and hold traffic up whilst doing that. No matter what she did you'll look worse for it shouting at a OAP sadly.

 

[MooMoo444]

Thread bump but I had my worst ever instance of this today, usual place and guess what, it was an OAP lady. Traffic was heavy and I came off the roundabout in the outside lane as I always do which allows traffic to join seamlessly from the slip road a couple of hundred yards up. Ratio of traffic is about 2/3 inside lane to 1/3 outside. All flowing quite nicely and as I get towards the merge point I position my car between the OAP in the Yaris and the car infront of her. She closes the gap "here we go" I thought but I carry on. As the lanes start to come together she sticks her car into the ever decreasing gap and leans on the horn. I should have just carried on but it was going to end in an accident. She literally was about an inch from ramming me for "pushing in". Adrenalin pumping through me I jump out of the car, I wanted to ask her if she actually did want to cause an accident. This probably looked quite threatening, I'm a fairly big guy but soft as **** and have never raised my hand to anyone, let alone an OAP but she wasn't to know that. So she drove up and over the curb and up the road.

Now the irony of it. Next set of lights is another merge in turn but because it has been there since forever people tend to use the outside lane if they are going straight over. So I pull up alongside her and signal for her to wind down her window staying in the car this time. I shouted across "Are you trying to cause an accident. That was two lanes merging in to one, just as it is up ahead. Two lanes.... merging in to one." I couldn't quite make out her response but it was along the lines of "If you try to wipe me out I'll wipe you out" Seriously, WTF. I'm commuting and she's at ******* war. I'm using the outer lane so as not to block traffic, she's looking for a fight.

Next time, I'll just do what I should have and drive her clean out of road if that's what she really wants.

You jumped out of your car to scare an old lady for the sake of one car length. Just let her go and filter in behind.

 

[lordrobs]

I get annoyed at the best of times but never to the point where I'd jump out of the car to shout at someone and hold traffic up whilst doing that. No matter what she did you'll look worse for it shouting at a OAP sadly.

You jumped out of your car to scare an old lady for the sake of one car length. Just let her go and filter in behind.

Totally agree I was in the wrong. TBH I was in shock a bit and wasn't probably reacting as I would normally. As for jumping out to scare an old lady, no. I jumped out and asked (not shouted) if she was trying to cause an accident after she deliberately and aggressively drove at me while I was merging in a perfectly normal way. She was early sixties at a guess and judging by her comment of how she would "wipe me out" quite clear about her actions.

I shouldn't have done it, I totally agree but I will defend my character here and say that it wasn't my intention to scare her. I was just in complete disbelief at her aggression and stupidity in her quest to stop me "pushing in".

EDIT - When I say shouted across, I shouted as in loud enough to be heard, not raging at her. Reading that back it sounded like I was being aggressive which wasn't the case.

Anyway, I shouldn't have done it. I looked like a tit and I hope that next time it happens I'll be able just to take a deep breath, accept the fact that another road user has tried to "wipe me out" for commuting and carry on with my life

 

[robj20]

Totally agree I was in the wrong. TBH I was in shock a bit and wasn't probably reacting as I would normally. As for jumping out to scare an old lady, no. I jumped out and asked (not shouted) if she was trying to cause an accident after she deliberately and aggressively drove at me while I was merging in a perfectly normal way. She was early sixties at a guess and judging by her comment of how she would "wipe me out" quite clear about her actions.

I shouldn't have done it, I totally agree but I will defend my character here and say that it wasn't my intention to scare her. I was just in complete disbelief at her aggression and stupidity in her quest to stop me "pushing in".

EDIT - When I say shouted across, I shouted as in loud enough to be heard, not raging at her. Reading that back it sounded like I was being aggressive which wasn't the case.

Anyway, I shouldn't have done it. I looked like a tit and I hope that next time it happens I'll be able just to take a deep breath, accept the fact that another road user has tried to "wipe me out" for commuting and carry on with my life

The thing I don't get is, it obviously causes a fair bit of stress all this. So even though you know you're in the right why not just drive more defensively and queue like everyone else.
I have taken this approach, I can't be arsed with the hassle of some vigilante smashing into my car.

 

[lordrobs]

The thing I don't get is, it obviously causes a fair bit of stress all this. So even though you know you're in the right why not just drive more defensively and queue like everyone else.
I have taken this approach, I can't be arsed with the hassle of some vigilante smashing into my car.

I may just do this. Who cares that they put in 500m of dual lanes to try and keep a slip road from a growing estate and a roundabout off of a major A road clear, much better to just sit there in a single line and block them both up while 500m of road space sits unused because people who can't just allow everyone to drive as per the rules of the road may try to drive into you.

Funnily enough this is the first time I'd had an issue since my original post and was by far the most aggressive driving I've ever had towards me in 18 years behind the wheel.

I was in the wrong for letting the adrenalin get to me. Live an learn and hopefully it will be at least another 18 years before I feel the need to get out of my car to point out that someone was going to drive into me for no reason what so ever.

 

[Tom_ed1987]

Just drive defensively. Get yourself in the zip position early, but leave an extra space in front. Slightest hint that you are beside a 'blocker', accelerate a bit & merge in the next space along. That way you have still used all the road, the blocker is still raging that you remain 'ahead'. Everyone wins

 

[robj20]

Just drive defensively.

the blocker is still raging that you remain 'ahead'. Everyone wins

Lol, the exact opposite of defensive driving. You don't win anything. Why do some people have this attitude that its a race. Why cant people just drive courteously.